3 ms·
This is kind of what Hanson is angling at. As I understand it, his thesis is that outside of obvious emergency stuff like infections, tumors, broken bones and s
by dunkelheit 5y ago
This is kind of what Hanson is angling at. As I understand it, his thesis is that outside of obvious emergency stuff like infections, tumors, broken bones and such most health impact comes from lifestyle variables such as diet, physical activity, level of stress and quality of sleep. This is not traditionally understood as "medicine" (i.e. something doctors prescribe). But when people have easy access to medicine, they will be compelled to go to doctors more and doctors have an incentive to prescribe more treatments than necessary to maintain the prestige of their profession. So in the end many of these treatments will have either negligible effect on health or even be actively harmful.
- akdor1154 5y agoYeah that seems TFA's take - i think OP's is (and mine is) that the effect of insurance is that if you're really unlucky and have a catastrophic illness/accident/etc, at least you won't be forced into poverty. This should not then be measured by health outcomes, but economic! It's quite plausible that health outcomes would be similar in aggregate. If you need urgent expensive surgery that takes your home deposit, you'll still pay it and live if you have no other option.